Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 4630353" data-attributes="member: 30001">It's 1 hp/day, right?&nbsp; Maybe 2 or 3 or something with complete bedrest.&nbsp; Remember the example of the 95 hp character?&nbsp; Your not sharing your math here.&nbsp; Take a 100th level character with 300 hitpoints and how long does he take to heal?&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;Well, I've heard it again and it still sounds ridiculous, or at least strange.&nbsp; In fact, you don't try to explain it as much as make vague allusions to some idea that I don't understand 1E &quot;rules&quot;.&nbsp; You can keep saying that but it would be helpful (and more relevant, actually) if it were substantiated.&nbsp;&nbsp;Well whatever they represent never really is an issue.&nbsp; &quot;Flexibility&quot; means his dexterity is lower?&nbsp; No, you only &quot;say&quot; flexibility.&nbsp; But heck, in 4E I can say that your character is feeling sore and tired when he's at max hitpoints.&nbsp; A 4E character goes through an adventure, takes X damage, heals it back with healing surges, then goes home.&nbsp; I can describe him as being injured and it's as demonstrable as claiming that a 95 hp character that takes 20 hp of damage is injured.&nbsp;&nbsp;These aren't rules, first of all.&nbsp; And secondly &quot;pontificating&quot; is in the eye of the beholder.&nbsp; I've been pretty specific about my objection.&nbsp; The points I'm &quot;hoping to score&quot; have to do with the issue at hand.&nbsp; Plus, you haven't contradicted anything I've said about the 1E &quot;rules&quot; that you're talking about.&nbsp;&nbsp;&quot;Completely&quot; would mean I hadn't heard of hit points before.&nbsp; You don't use language very precisely.&nbsp; You should be more specific about what it is in the &quot;rules&quot; that I don't get.&nbsp; Keep in mind that some general musings by Gygax about the concept of hitpoints are not &quot;rules&quot;.&nbsp; Allowing hp damage to essentially mean &quot;anything you want them to&quot; is not a rule, really, is it?&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;I have read it.&nbsp; &quot;No one who has eaten coleslaw likes it&quot;, according to your strange reasoning.&nbsp; I'm not sure why you find it necessary to base your arguments on stuff that you don't really know.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;In what way is that &quot;fairly assumed&quot; other than you say so?&nbsp; Those so-called &quot;significant physical injuries&quot; manifest themselves in NO OTHER WAY in the rules.&nbsp; He still has 18/00 strength.&nbsp; He still has 18 Dex.&nbsp; He still has a 12&quot; movement rate.&nbsp; He's not more likely to be surprised because he's dizzy or tired.&nbsp; I've gone over this though - I'm really trying to get you to recognize that the abstractions between 3E and 4E are very similar.&nbsp;&nbsp;All sorts of things are clear to you that I don't agree with - I'll add this to the list. &nbsp;&nbsp;Is finding your explanations, as they stand, contradictory, unconvincing, and not entirely informed by either the 4E rules or the logical consequences of 1E philosophy considered &quot;condeming&quot;?&nbsp; I've tried to explain the basis for each one of these opinions.&nbsp; Step 1 of me &quot;knowing the full explanation&quot; would be for you to give one.&nbsp;&nbsp;There's already been a post on mind-reading.&nbsp; What I&quot;m &quot;willfully&quot; trying to do is explain why what you say doesn't seem right to me.&nbsp;&nbsp;Then AFAICT you're talking about something that has nothing to do with 4E hitpoints, since healing surges are a daily resource.&nbsp;&nbsp;You can recover all of your hitpoints in several rounds.&nbsp; Then you can recover those spells in a day.&nbsp; I don't think I need to spell this out, do I?&nbsp; You can &quot;reset&quot; in a day in 1E, and IME it was not uncommon - mainly because PCs wouldn't wait to lose all but 1 of their hitpoints before they retreated.&nbsp;&nbsp;I think it's pretty much indisputable that 4E has a different &quot;management&quot; philosophy - that was the whole point of the change.&nbsp; The 4E designers felt that this management philosophy would address game issues like the &quot;15 minute adventuring day&quot;.&nbsp; The the point that I was mainly trying to address is that there don't appear to be any real conceptual differences between what 1E and 4E hitpoints system represent.&nbsp;&nbsp;I thought the answer to this was obvious.&nbsp; I'm assuming this because it appears to be the case from what I'm reading.&nbsp; IMO two people can know the same set of facts but come to different conclusions for reasons of logic and preference.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;No.&nbsp; How close is your question here to what the objection really is?&nbsp; I'm not objecting to the statement that 4E has different granularity.&nbsp; I'm objecting that 1E is somehow less abstract than 4E.&nbsp;&nbsp;You keep asking me to nevermind something that you say over and over.&nbsp; And you have a backspace key, which would make it easier for me to ignore this.&nbsp; Maybe just explain how long you think someone who takes 95 points of damage would take to recover?&nbsp;And I'm not mocking 1E.&nbsp; I'm objecting to the certainty that certain persons apply to their interpretation of 1E rules.&nbsp; I'm critical of the seeming fact that anyone who tries to suggest that 1E injury is somehow better defined than 4E can't really provide any specifics.&nbsp; The mechanics and resource mangement issues are different but you're claiming that 1E gives you information that I really don't think it does.&nbsp; I can *say* that a guy in 4E is walking around with cuts and bruises on him with an equally convincing (ie. not much of one) basis as in 1E.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gizmo33, post: 4630353, member: 30001"] It's 1 hp/day, right? Maybe 2 or 3 or something with complete bedrest. Remember the example of the 95 hp character? Your not sharing your math here. Take a 100th level character with 300 hitpoints and how long does he take to heal? Well, I've heard it again and it still sounds ridiculous, or at least strange. In fact, you don't try to explain it as much as make vague allusions to some idea that I don't understand 1E "rules". You can keep saying that but it would be helpful (and more relevant, actually) if it were substantiated. Well whatever they represent never really is an issue. "Flexibility" means his dexterity is lower? No, you only "say" flexibility. But heck, in 4E I can say that your character is feeling sore and tired when he's at max hitpoints. A 4E character goes through an adventure, takes X damage, heals it back with healing surges, then goes home. I can describe him as being injured and it's as demonstrable as claiming that a 95 hp character that takes 20 hp of damage is injured. These aren't rules, first of all. And secondly "pontificating" is in the eye of the beholder. I've been pretty specific about my objection. The points I'm "hoping to score" have to do with the issue at hand. Plus, you haven't contradicted anything I've said about the 1E "rules" that you're talking about. "Completely" would mean I hadn't heard of hit points before. You don't use language very precisely. You should be more specific about what it is in the "rules" that I don't get. Keep in mind that some general musings by Gygax about the concept of hitpoints are not "rules". Allowing hp damage to essentially mean "anything you want them to" is not a rule, really, is it? I have read it. "No one who has eaten coleslaw likes it", according to your strange reasoning. I'm not sure why you find it necessary to base your arguments on stuff that you don't really know. In what way is that "fairly assumed" other than you say so? Those so-called "significant physical injuries" manifest themselves in NO OTHER WAY in the rules. He still has 18/00 strength. He still has 18 Dex. He still has a 12" movement rate. He's not more likely to be surprised because he's dizzy or tired. I've gone over this though - I'm really trying to get you to recognize that the abstractions between 3E and 4E are very similar. All sorts of things are clear to you that I don't agree with - I'll add this to the list. Is finding your explanations, as they stand, contradictory, unconvincing, and not entirely informed by either the 4E rules or the logical consequences of 1E philosophy considered "condeming"? I've tried to explain the basis for each one of these opinions. Step 1 of me "knowing the full explanation" would be for you to give one. There's already been a post on mind-reading. What I"m "willfully" trying to do is explain why what you say doesn't seem right to me. Then AFAICT you're talking about something that has nothing to do with 4E hitpoints, since healing surges are a daily resource. You can recover all of your hitpoints in several rounds. Then you can recover those spells in a day. I don't think I need to spell this out, do I? You can "reset" in a day in 1E, and IME it was not uncommon - mainly because PCs wouldn't wait to lose all but 1 of their hitpoints before they retreated. I think it's pretty much indisputable that 4E has a different "management" philosophy - that was the whole point of the change. The 4E designers felt that this management philosophy would address game issues like the "15 minute adventuring day". The the point that I was mainly trying to address is that there don't appear to be any real conceptual differences between what 1E and 4E hitpoints system represent. I thought the answer to this was obvious. I'm assuming this because it appears to be the case from what I'm reading. IMO two people can know the same set of facts but come to different conclusions for reasons of logic and preference. No. How close is your question here to what the objection really is? I'm not objecting to the statement that 4E has different granularity. I'm objecting that 1E is somehow less abstract than 4E. You keep asking me to nevermind something that you say over and over. And you have a backspace key, which would make it easier for me to ignore this. Maybe just explain how long you think someone who takes 95 points of damage would take to recover? And I'm not mocking 1E. I'm objecting to the certainty that certain persons apply to their interpretation of 1E rules. I'm critical of the seeming fact that anyone who tries to suggest that 1E injury is somehow better defined than 4E can't really provide any specifics. The mechanics and resource mangement issues are different but you're claiming that 1E gives you information that I really don't think it does. I can *say* that a guy in 4E is walking around with cuts and bruises on him with an equally convincing (ie. not much of one) basis as in 1E. [/QUOTE]

Verification